Case 2405813/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Miss T Swain v Connor Associates trading as Holywell Care Services — 2024
- Case reference
- 2405813/2023
- Decision date
- 10 September 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Butler
- Venue
- Manchester
- Panel members
- Ms LA Buxton, Mr M Stemp
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss T Swain
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, sitting at Manchester on 2 to 5 September 2024 before Employment Judge M Butler with Ms LA Buxton and Mr M Stemp, dismissed the claimant's whistleblowing claims. It found that the allegation that the claimant had been subjected to a detriment because she had made a public interest disclosure failed, and that the allegation that she was dismissed for the reason, or principal reason, of having made a public interest disclosure also failed.
The written judgment records that, for the avoidance of doubt, all claims failed and were dismissed. It also notes that reasons for the decision were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested in accordance with the note on the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whistleblowing | The judgment records a complaint of detriment on the grounds of having made a public interest disclosure. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | The judgment records a complaint that the claimant was dismissed for the reason, or principal reason, of having made a public interest disclosure. | Dismissed | — | — |
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.